Frankly, I don't give a flying F about the license of my edits, as long as anyone can use them.

(I DO care about the fact that a lot of existing data from others may be removed in the future, which is by itself reason enough to consider a license change plain dumb.)

I know there was an option to grant your contributions public domain status, which I selected, but that was no more than a poll. What was missing was an option to explicitly license contributions under both new and old license.

This way, in case of an OSM fork, my new edits can still be used for both.

Saying that your contributions are PD is more than just a poll. I can't see any circumstances in which OSMF would be dumb enough to sue someone for using data which has been explicitly declared by the data's creator to be public domain.

Well, they were dumb enough to change the license and antagonize a whole lot of people for very little benefit (at best).

Also, on one hand, they're changing the license for relatively obscure reasons, but on the other hand we just have to assume that all will be ok? That's not exactly a consequent position, don't you think?

Also, any fork will have the backup of all deleted CC-BY-SA data available "as long as possible". So the old data will still be available, should anybody feel that it is worth the trouble to create a dual-licensed db.